This "simplification" is great for the cases where all the
contained elements are in the same group, but if your elements
are from more than one group, then a container mechanism is
necessary.
consider
<D:prop>
<meta>
<rdf:RDF>
<rdf:Description about="" xmlns:dc="...">
<dc:title>
<rdf:Alt>
<rdf:Alt>
<rdf:li xml:lang="en-us">English Title</rdf:li>
<rdf:li xml:lang="fr">French Title</rdf:li>
</rdf:Alt>
<rdf:Alt>
<rdf:li xml:lang="en-us">Alternative English Title</rdf:li>
<rdf:li xml:lang="fr">Alternative French Title</rdf:li>
</rdf:Alt>
</rdf:Alt>
</dc:title>
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
</meta>
</D:prop>
Now this could be managed using by using Perry's simplification with
repeated <dc:title> elements as the containers, but by then there is
little gain.
Natural language, algebra and traditional programming languages
use parentheses &| braces for grouping pretty much anything.
But the XML syntax says that all "operators" must have the form
<something>, hence containers like <rdf:Alt> </rdf:Alt>, etc.
They are just wordy parens, plus a little extra semantics ...
"Perry A. Caro" wrote:
>
> Questions: what about containers?
...
> I hope the
> answer isn't conversion to the rdf:_1, rdf:_2, etc. notation, which is no
> simplification if you ask me.
>
> >From a purely XSLT/XPath manipulation point-of-view, the simplification I'd
> like to see is something like the following:
>
> <dc:title>
> <rdf:Alt xml:lang="en-us">English Title</rdf:Alt>
> <rdf:Alt xml:lang="fr">French Title</rdf:Alt>
> </dc:title>
--
Best Simon